"He stopped in front of the McDonald’s Coffee Cup Case exhibit. 'The lawyers didn’t tell people that McDonald’s kept their coffee that hot for commercial advantage. So it would stay hotter than Burger King’s as you drove along the highway. They’d already gotten seven hundred complaints about the burns.' Nader shook his head and looked at his guest, who nodded. He had changed one mind. He seemed satisfied."
From "Ralph Nader’s Tort Museum" (in The New Yorker), about the American Museum of Tort Law in Winsted, Connecticut.
ADDED: If you're like me, the first 3 words of the post title started a Bob Dylan song playing in your head: "Inside the museums, Infinity goes up on trial/Voices echo this is what salvation must be like after a while/But Mona Lisa musta had the highway blues/You can tell by the way she smiles/See the primitive wallflower freeze/When the jelly-faced women all sneeze/Hear the one with the mustache say, 'Jeeze/I can’t find my knees'..."
If you can’t find your knees/I'd say, jeeze/That's a tort that that someone did fease/Help me, Ralph Nader, please...
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१२८ टिप्पण्या:
Well what other reason would McDonalds keep their coffee hot for, if not for the fact that people preferred to buy coffee from fast food chains that stayed hot longer?
Yeah, McDonald's kept their coffee that hot because that is how their customers wanted it.
Here's an idea- don't apply scalding hot liquid to your thighs. It might, you know, scald you.
In the (legal) world that we live in, when you receive 700 complaints (notices) that you are serving a dangerous product, the prudent business decision is to modify your behavior.
I give this advice pro bono.
My disgust for Ralph Nader will always be tempered by the fact that he very well may have kept Al Gore from being president.
As for the coffee cup suit, the issue isn't "did they keep the coffee hot just for commercial advantage". It's "was McDonalds negligent in its coffee temperature and cup design, and was this the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury."
I understand the case was more complicated than the initial reports suggested, but Nader is pushing this idiotically anti-free market message which sadly seems to be the dominant opinion on the left these days.
They're McDonald's. They get at least 700 complaints about everything.
If they were going to modify their practices, why not end serving coffee at the drive-up window ?
I saw plenty of coffee scalds in the crotch. It's not a rare injury.
"Here's an idea- don't apply scalding hot liquid to your thighs. It might, you know, scald you."
My understanding was that the cup design was defective, and McDonalds had prior notice of this. The jury initially found the plaintiff partly negligent but found McDonalds mostly negligent in using that cup design and in keeping the coffee at a much higher temperature than the customers wanted (this was more to ensure people wouldn't drink it as fast and discourage free refills). The plaintiff tried taking the top off of the cup while sitting in her parked car, and it spilled on her lap and burned her pants to her leg. Initially, she tried to claim just her medical damages, McDs turned down settlement so the jury eventually found against them with huge punitives, which were dropped lower after appeal.
"If they were going to modify their practices, why not end serving coffee at the drive-up window ?"
I'm amazed that at Cosi (formerly Xando) they serve "S'mores" where they bring a burner to your table and you toast the marshmallows yourself. (At least they did as of a few years ago). And they serve alchohol!
Paul Zrimsek said...
They're McDonald's. They get at least 700 complaints about everything.
But not about the fries !
OKOK, I haven't had MacD's in 20 years so ....
It's wonderful how Ralph Nader foisted his emotional problems onto the entire country. Reminds me of Obama.
Nader, whose only earthly pleasures are apparently a comfortable pair of shoes and a sense of righteous indignation
That about sums him up. Many, actually.
Bewildered townspeople?
GAAAAHL-EEE, MAW!
LOOKY THERE!
THEY DONE GOT RUNNING WATER . . . AND EVERYTHING!!!
I wonder if there is an exhibit that discusses tort suits' effect on medical malpractice insurance premiums over time, and whether said suits have caused significant increases in overall costs. I hear that idea talked about from time to time but I'd love to see a Reader's Digest-type breakdown that discusses actual numbers some day.
Ralph Nader is the pallid poster child for our overly litigious society. He's the scalding hot coffee on thighs of reasonable conflict resolution.
wapo would always point out how nader had the same apartment he lived in for 30 years when he first came to Washington. Funny, they never told you of his multi-million dollar home in Connecticut or his four homes he owned around the world that he had in his siblings names to hide the fact he owned four homes around the world! That is until he pissed them off by running in the 2000 election as a third party candidate. They must not have known and a little bird tipped them off that the modest leftwing crusader lifestyle wasn't as modest as they themselves had intentionally (mis)led us to believe.
Just like bill cosby found out; don't piss off the left or they will all of a sudden discover what they already knew about you and start dishing. Be forewarned!
"this was more to ensure people wouldn't drink it as fast and discourage free refills"
Do you have any evidence for this ?
"an exhibit that discusses tort suits' effect on medical malpractice insurance premiums "
This was obvious for a while in California. In 1975, the legislature passed MICRA, a reform that capped "pain and suffering" at $250,000. There was no limit on economic damages. For years after, until I retired, California had much lower malpractice rates.
Also, I spent some time as an expert witness for both plaintiff and defense. This was in several states, not just California. I think I saw, and some plaintiff layers agreed with me, that the really abusive class action suits, like silicone and tobacco and asbestos, affected the jury pool and made ordinary people far less willing to find for plaintiffs if there was any doubt.
There was a famous case in Alabama, called the BMW paint case that radically changed the jury sentiments where a large plaintiff law firm I knew quite well, decided to get out of the malpractice business altogether,
People are recognizing the risks for society in lawyers run amok.
"Do you have any evidence for this ?"
I believe it was from an article linked on Snopes but I can't pull it up on this computer. The plaintiff showed that while most fast food and diners offered coffee at a standard temperature, McDs was the outlier and some executives testified that one of the reasons for the hotter temperature was to encourage people to finish the coffee at home, rather than at the store or in the parking lot, where they could get a refill.
"I wonder if there is an exhibit that discusses tort suits' effect on medical malpractice insurance premiums over time, and whether said suits have caused significant increases in overall costs."
The problem is it's much harder to measure the losses to society due to overlitigiousness. We can't really show innovations that never got developed, or medicines that never were invented due to malpractice liability risks. But those costs are certainly there.
If they were going to modify their practices, why not end serving coffee at the drive-up window ?
I saw plenty of coffee scalds in the crotch. It's not a rare injury.
9/29/15, 12:10 PM
---
Do they typically require extensive skin grafts, as the lady in this case did?
I actually did spill hot tea in my lap as a little girl, then sat in it longer than I should have because my seven-year-old panicked brain couldn't figure out how to unbuckle the seatbelt. I got an ugly burn and had to lay around at home wearing just a big t-shirt and ointment, and was miserable (though I think I had some pretty cool pain meds) for a few days. Still nothing like the pictures of the lady in the McDonalds case, because the tea that my parents (stupidly) let me carry into the car was a reasonable temperature, while the coffee McDonalds served was not. If she'd gotten the kind of burn I got, it would've been unreasonable to sue. But she didn't, and it wasn't.
The McDonald's case is a great example of how, if a jury decision seems crazy to you, then important facts were probably left out. McDonald's got off easy, they knowingly maimed their customers because it was easier to pay them off than to fix the problem.
I agree with Brando -- Ralph Nader and his piss-ignorant Naderites might be utterly worthless on the best day of their lives, but without him Al Gore might well have been the President on 9/11/2001. Contemplating that still makes me shudder.
PS: The folks backing Jeb need to ask themselves whether he can bring in Florida given that he couldn't bring it in by comfortable margins for his brother in 2000
When I got coffee from the coffeemaker at the office, I would put the cup in the microwave and give it another 15-20 seconds to get it up to temperature.
I also just thought of it that the McDonald's case was here in Albuquerque, i.e. between 4,950 and 6,500 feet of altitude, so this McD's could not have had their coffee all that hot.
Some of the ones I saw did and children are always b]getting scalded by pulling things off tables.
The argument in the McDonalds case was whether there was a valid reason for the coffee temperature and I am sure a plaintiff source will allege some nefarious reason. I had a long debate with a lawyer years ago about this very case and she sent me some stuff that she thought made her case. I've forgotten the details now but I was not convinced of the facts then.
I used to participate in a trial lawyer news group in the days of usenet. Some lawyers would post serious questions about potential cases. I was once going to write a book for lawyers to suggest how to use expert witnesses in med-mal cases. Some of that is in my memoir book where I have a chapter on courts and legal issues.
"Al Gore might well have been the President on 9/11/2001. Contemplating that still makes me shudder. "
I have a theory that Gore went psychotic as a result of the 2000 election. He didn't seem that crazy before, although his book is pretty nutty. I was not that concerned as I was not a Bush fan in 2000. I had supported McCain in 2000 but thought he was too old in 2008.
I don't open anything over any part of myself. It seems like common sense. Even a can of Coke can ruin a good day if you get it all over yourself.
The Tort Law system of Anglo-American jurisprudence has worked well 240 years in compensating the damaged ones and penalizing the arrogant don't give a damn ones.
But starting in Rick Perry's Texas that system has been destroyed by self righteous faux conservatives bragging that they hate lawyers the most while taking in donor money by the ton from manufacturers.
It is enough to make one vote for an Elizabeth Warren.
"In the (legal) world that we live in, when you receive 700 complaints (notices) that you are serving a dangerous product, the prudent business decision is to modify your behavior."
In an ideal world (from the PoV of a tort lawyer) there are no safe harbors.
Which may not apply to hot coffee, but surely applies to employment law.
I eagerly await the eventuality of the Tort Museum being sued for something.
'The lawyers didn’t tell people that McDonald’s kept their coffee that hot for commercial advantage.
Nader didn't tell people that "commercial advantage" means "customers like it".
@TG
Perry, Texas, self righteous, faux conservatives, big money from manufacturers, wow, you worked in a good bit through the checklist from How to Think Like a Liberal for Dummies.
"It is enough to make one vote for an Elizabeth Warren."
Yes, she is a paragon of lawyerly practices.
When did Texas conservatives ever help a horribly injured consumer of a negligently designed product other that help themselves to,loot from donors who own those manufacturing enterprises for the state legislature to declare the right to tort recovery was limited to near nothing.
Fixing the game by changing the rules to make the rich get richer while the poor to die in misery is not conservative. It is the worst kind of stealing. Real conservatives base their thinking on reality, not a pretense that the Legal is too liberal. How big a fool are you?
"When did Texas conservatives ever help a horribly injured consumer of a negligently designed product other that help themselves to,loot from donors who own those manufacturing enterprises for the state legislature to declare the right to tort recovery was limited to near nothing."
I'm trying to figure out what that might have sounded like in the original Swahili. It looks like Google Translate didn't do such a great job.
Most of the world finds our legal system sad.
I've known Europeans who have said they'd be embarrassed to admit not knowing how to use shampoo, but we Americans are willing to do that.
PS: The folks backing Jeb need to ask themselves whether he can bring in Florida given that he couldn't bring it in by comfortable margins for his brother in 2000
I won't defend Jeb...but when the media calls the state for Gore while the polls in the Republican part of the state are still open tends to hurt the vote a lot.
Real conservatives base their thinking on reality, not a pretense that the Legal is too liberal. How big a fool are you?
I'm starting to wonder why you know what conservatives base anything on.
My two lawyer children are the two who are so left wing I cannot talk about politics to either.
@damikesc, in 2000 Jeb was governor of Florida and -- according the Jeb supporters -- a wildly popular governor at that.
"Inside the museums, Infinity goes up on trial/Voices echo this is what salvation must be like after a while . . ."
Ouch. More poetry that people who don't like poetry might like.
Nader should be an exhibit in the tort museum, not an escort.
"@damikesc, in 2000 Jeb was governor of Florida and -- according the Jeb supporters -- a wildly popular governor at that."
Not to defend Jeb's claims, but he'd been in office less than two years at that point, and governors can't do a whole lot to swing a presidential election in their state, even if the candidate is their brother. But I also don't think as a presidential candidate himself in 2016 Jeb has any special lock on Florida, either.
"The lawyers didn’t tell people that McDonald’s kept their coffee that hot for commercial advantage."
But then he went on....
"In fact, the lawyers didn't tell people that everything that McDonald's did was done for commercial advantage. In fact," and here Nader leaned in closer so I could see the pain in his eyes, "McDonalds was a 'commercial' enterprise through and through." I gasped in shock. One more convert....
@damikesc, in 2000 Jeb was governor of Florida and -- according the Jeb supporters -- a wildly popular governor at that.
True. But who stays in lines at a poll when the race is over?
The most conservative estimate I've seen is that it cost Bush 10,000 votes. Other estimates have it at around 60,000 or so.
Again, not defending Jeb. If he wins the nomination, I just won't vote.
Of course it was for commercial advantage.
The fact that they were even selling coffee was for commercial advantage.
damikesc said...
I've known Europeans who have said they'd be embarrassed to admit not knowing how to use shampoo, but we Americans are willing to do that.
9/29/15, 2:40 PM
Yeah, us idiot Americans don't even know how to wash our hair- Shampoo? What's that? LOL! Yeah, some European assholes are full of shit.
Product design is Nader's area of Tort Law. If a new product causes harm when being used for its intended use, then inquiring minds want to know why it was not designed to be safer. When ten million have been sold at a 200 million dollar profit, the design flaws which are discovered can be fixed and a insurance settlements made for the dead or mutilated test humans.
Or the Insurance premiums can be cut in half if the manufacturer relies on a legislature to cap negligence damages so cheap claims cannot be litigated over Multiple tactile years delays and still have a hoped being a success. That the defective product keeps being shipped out with defects and the bottom line still
improves. The dead and injured are slandered
money hungry poor people who are to stupid to live anyway,and the manufacturer becomes a GOP bundler attending inauguration balls. The State gets more startup manufacturers it can brag about.
That is realty. To insist on ignoring it over a Conservative vs. Liberal label game is ignorance with amounts to an
evil intent
Why is it that once sensible commenters after a certain point in time appear to go off their meds?
"Sorry, but if you collected any money as a paid expert witness, you're in on the game. Higher medical malpractice premiums are due to folks like you!"
Well, I can certainly see why your comments keep disappearing. Who supports you ?
Is this Nader museum next to the biggest ball of wax museum?
"And this wing of the museum is dedicated to the time I tried to run for president and gave the election to George Bush when idiots voted for me. I still get calls from Tim Robbins about how he's going to punch me in the face if he ever sees me."
""In fact, the lawyers didn't tell people that everything that McDonald's did was done for commercial advantage. In fact," and here Nader leaned in closer so I could see the pain in his eyes, "McDonalds was a 'commercial' enterprise through and through." I gasped in shock. One more convert...."
No. f*cking. way! That's like learning that women have vaginas. Totally blows your mind.
""He stopped in front of the McDonald’s Coffee Cup Case exhibit. 'The lawyers didn’t tell people that McDonald’s kept their coffee that hot for commercial advantage. So it would stay hotter than Burger King’s as you drove along the highway. They’d already gotten seven hundred complaints about the burns.'"
What COMMERCIAL ADVANTAGE would McDonalds have making their coffee hotter. It sounds like it was hotter because that's what customers asked for. Otherwise there would be an advantage to keep your coffee less hot.
My guess is there was a commercial advantage to Mcdonalds coffee because people who went to drive thrus and bought coffee at Burger King had luke warm coffee by the time they went to drink it. And Mcdonalds was still hot. Therefore, the customers actually wanted the coffee to be hotter not less hot. Hence, the commercial advantage.
So, blame customers who want piping hot coffee and also want to drive in cars. Do you want the less hot coffee or do you want the increased likelihood that in rare cases you might suffer 3rd degree burns because you drop the coffee on your lap? Most people don't drop coffee on their laps, but do want the hot coffee.
"So it would stay hotter than Burger King’s as you drove along the highway. They’d already gotten seven hundred complaints about the burns.'
700 burns out of how many cups of coffee sold? I think Mcdonalds sells 10 million cups of coffee every day.
Handing things hot enough to cause third degree burns through a window and into a car seems absurd to me. Obvious hazard.
If that sounds ridiculous, imagine a hardware store selling strong acids in lidded paper cups through drive through windows. Stupid.
I'm sure the big bad execs laugh and mock when you tell them what shits they are, traditionalguy, just as you make your feeble attempts at japery when called on your own iniquities.
Your questions, like your statements, are always so jam packed with assumptions that your need is probably not for debate but for a stool softener.
As for what did the mean guys in Texas do for anybody, probably you forgot all the jobs and salary and revenue their policies fostered, the better to treat whatever cripples some bottom feeder like you scraped off the floor of some drunk tank or psych ward.
IOW, 100000000% more than you, Mr. Third.
700 complaints only includes those who bothered to complain.
"700 burns out of how many cups of coffee sold? I think Mcdonalds sells 10 million cups of coffee every day."
There's a reason so many for so long weren't taught math, or context, or independent reasoning in school: it makes them much better prospective jurors when the lawyers can fill their heads with only the "facts" they want the jurors to know.
Because learning there were 700 complaints (if they were all within one year) out of 3.5 billion cups of coffee sold sort of changes the context and degree of the problem, doesn't it?
I wonder about the complaints that the coffee was not hot enough - more or less than 700? Inquiring minds want to know.
What do you think "chemically redesigned" means? If you tell me I'll provide you with the proper English translation. People are funny when they talk about stuff they don't know.
It seems unlikely that McD would refuse to idiot proof their coffee, win or lose. Who needs the aggravation? Having been through it, not happy to go through it again.
Not sure I was alive then, or if I was, coffee was not then my drink, so no recollection of what horrible, horrible cups they must have used.
Probably same as every non-deep-pocket purveyor of hot drinks still uses nowadays.
If they were conservatives or men then althouse would tell them to quit whining.
The McD coffee spill case was great for Big Law. Every fastfood chain needed to have its team of coffee-spill lawyers. Good times. Good times.
And yet, Freeman, apparently of the 10m cups per day sold, something like 9,999,999 are handed in and out of cars without incident. Probably because the strong acids thing isn't a very good analogy.
It isn't served as hot anymore. And the cups are better now too.
Oh, you're a lawyer. I asked what you do that ISN'T harmful.
Again, not defending Jeb. If he wins the nomination, I just won't vote.
@damikesc, if the Dems nominate Hillary I don't care if the storm of the century is blowing through, I'm going to vote for whoever the Republicans put up.
It's sort of like the popular T-shirts you see in the Big Ten* on football weekends. The ones that say "Every Saturday I root for two teams, the (fill in the blank with, for instance, "Golden Gophers," "Fighting Illini," "Boilermakers," "Badgers," etc.) and whoever's playing Michigan."
Also, it's 700 claims, not complaints. That's quite different.
As for your lies about doctors, whatever schmuck won this petunia her $3m or whatever, made for himself more than the pay of all medical personnel involved in the case, and all the witnesses too. Her treatment didn't cost a million, nothing like it. Did you groove on Obama yammering about doctors who amputate because that's where the bucks are? My God, woman, how do you continue to eat and eliminate unaided?
It's 700 claims, not complaints. There's a big difference.
Was the 700 in a year or since 1955?
Are you saying you want coffee sold only in Thermoses or Dewar's flasks? How much anti-stupid is enough?
It was learned that McDonald’s was aware of more than 700 claims brought against it between 1982 and 1992 due to people being burned by its coffee.34 Some of these claims involved third-degree burns that were substantially similar to the burns suffered by Liebeck.35 Moreover, McDonald’s had previously spent over $500,000 in settling these prior coffee-burn claims.36
From http://www.jtexconsumerlaw.com/V11N1/Coffee.pdf
I like the coffee alright the way it is served now. I often order coffee from McDonald's. (Heck, I'd like it even better slightly cooler.)
But the point here isn't my preference.
So that's about 70 a year. Out of 10m. Settled at about $800/claim.
What, again, was so special about the 9,999,930 who didn't sue? Not clumsy, or not blaming others for their clumsiness?
Personally I am more of a tea drinker. And if it's going to be a crummy teabag service, I want that water at 212℉, or to be recently and slightly removed from that temperature. Piddly 160℉ water is impossible to make even passable tea with.
Likewise, I seem to recall a McD exec saying, 'when the customer burns his mouth on it, then he can be confident of the freshness of the coffee' or words to that effect.
How many burn claims per million sold did BK get? Wendy's?
So that's about 70 a year. Out of 10m.
That's 700 people who actually sued. Not 700 people burned.
I stand by what I've written. It's moronic for a company to pass something that hot through a window, especially in those old cups. Absolutely moronic.
I'm not at all anti-McDonald's. I like McDonald's. I'm glad they had to change the way they serve coffee though.
Ambulance chasers, unions, and community organizers are basically legal extortion
Google says that McDonald's sells a billion cups of coffee/year. 70 complaints/year comes to one per 14 million served. What do you want to bet that one $800 claim for the complaint is dwarfed by the profit from the 14 million?
My view is that if you spill something which is known to be hot on yourself, it is your fault. The only exception would be if the container is defective. This means the bottom falls off, not the container failing to survive being squeezed between your thighs.
I was daunted by how hot their coffee was the first time I got it. I was pleased that it was still acceptably hot even after 20 miles down the interstate though.
Meadehouse should check out the Mona Lisa. Maybe the parts (i.e. Meade & house) have done so individually, but the combo might as well try it.
Flying isn't so bad. It's better than a slow train.
I'm sure you think a lot about pegging, as that would be as close as you ever come to receiving cock. Althouse, crazy as she is, can probably still get boned, although she seems to be retiring from that game. You? Grateful rescue mutts and lots of peanut butter.
Which would chill these lawsuits more effectively, do you think, assassination of a plaintiff from time to time, or of plaintiff's counsel?
Likewise, I seem to recall a McD exec saying, 'when the customer burns his mouth on it, then he can be confident of the freshness of the coffee' or words to that effect.
I'd like to pry his mouth open and pour some of his "fresh" coffee down it. I hate to wait for stuff to cool so I can drink/eat it. Morons who want their coffee hot 20 minutes later should buy it 20 minutes later or get a thermos.
So, Jack, you can open your own fast food chain, serve hundreds of billions, and offer them all lukewarm coffee, or just hot enough coffee which will be lukewarm in 5 minutes, less if you add cream. Let me know how that works out for you.
Stop the presses.
Are you telling me that McDonald's -- the giant multinational corporation we all know so well -- has actually been in business all this time to get "commercial advantages" from the choices it makes in providing its products to its customers?
That explains so very much. Thank you, Captain Obvious, for that epiphany.
Sorry, I thought you claimed to be a lawyer. Were you out the day they taught, uh, law? There was no threat, and wouldn't be even if I expressed the desire to know where you lived, or the wish that you be eaten by sharks.
As for how much you're getting, suuuure. Ok, maybe you have a Costco membership, and can keep enough peanut butter in stock. I do esteem you for taking in all those strays, though I cannot commend your treatment of them.
If pretty is as pretty does, you must have a face that would stop Big Ben. You really must be the ugliest woman on earth, and you must know it, too. C'mon tell the truth, do you weigh more like 300 lbs or are you closer to 400?
The jury was sending a new price signal. Before, it cost $50,000 a year to sell dangerously hot coffee. After, it would cost millions.
I remember my parents complaining about the coffee as a kid. I remember because you weren't to reach anywhere near any adult holding it. My dad used to order coffee with ice cubes in it.
Have all of you complaining about this verdict been unhappy with coffee for the last twenty years? It's been all lukewarm for two decades?
"Personally I am more of a tea drinker. And if it's going to be a crummy teabag service, I want that water at 212℉, or to be recently and slightly removed from that temperature. Piddly 160℉ water is impossible to make even passable tea with."
Poser alert.
Even beginner big-dollar tea folks know that the water temperature should be adjusted to the type of tea. E.g. white and green are well below boiling.
Shut the fuck up sandwich, I can't recapitulate the universe in every post. For one thing, it gets cooler when you pour it into the cup or pot, much more so if unwarmed porcelain. For another, I want to know that it did boil at some time in the recent past. If I want to modulate down to green tea levels, yeah, I will wait, stir, open the lid, or whatever. I know you feel like you always have to go for the win, but pace yourself. You're not going to "destroy me in six words" like a listicle or clickbait. (Oh yeah! My oolong wants 175℉, I forgot. Guess I have to vote Democrat now, fair is fair. <--NOT)
"I can't recapitulate the universe in every post."
Ok, but can you try to avoid writing things that are completely wrong?
Okay. I order tea at McDonald's, or for that matter a fine French restaurant. Sadly, I get a teabag and a cup of hot water. I wish the water to be served at or close to boiling, so I can take it away and arrange the steeping to my pleasure.
This is completely wrong, how? I assume from your energy that you're a tea drinker too. Wherein have I erred, other than ordering tea in a hypothetical restaurant that doesn't love to make tea? You don't boil your water for a while and let it cool to whatever temp? You just heat it to 175℉ and add your King's Tea Green First Grade willy-nilly?
You just like to hear yourself talk, don't you?
Really, it's come to this? I just want to be served my tea with boiling water so that I can make tea with room to work. I didn't say I would brew and serve tea at boiling point. Unless George Orwell or a like Englishman were visiting. Do I also have to clarify that this assumes being served the makings of tea, and not a cup of brewed tea?
Big Mike said...
"Again, not defending Jeb. If he wins the nomination, I just won't vote.
@damikesc, if the Dems nominate Hillary I don't care if the storm of the century is blowing through, I'm going to vote for whoever the Republicans put up."
If those are the choices I am going 3rd party: revolution.
"You just like to hear yourself talk, don't you?"
Guilty
I am so happy as a customer to know that I am paying marginally higher prices for pretty much everything but particularly for health care so that I can subsidize the legal industry.
If you don't like their product because it is too hot or you think it is dangerous I have a solution for you: DON'T BUY THE FUCKING COFFEE.
You know what they call 100 lawyers in a shipping container sunk to the bottom of the ocean? Not trying to put soldiers in jail anymore.
Kthnx.
Also if I had planned ahead that far, I would obviously have a container of actual loose leaf tea. (They probably don't have that where you come from, but doubtless PBJ will be happy to explain.) Even then I would be at the mercy of the seller of hot water, or does my improvidence extend to the lack of a personal kettle or samovar?
I really am out of fucks to give about what you are "sure" of. I wouldn't expect you to understand, it's probably hard to keep your dog bowls hot. But you're right, much easier to keep a woman with a teapot in the car, or in my bag. Much cleverer. I see now how you got where you are today.
BTW, whatever I am, you are a lawyer and that's worse.
I like Hot Water but not Hot Hot Water.
I am OK with Water between Hot and Hot Hot. Not Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot.
I like my Peanut Butter room temperature. I do not want my Jelly room temperature, that is too warm for Jelly.
I am OK with women who are Crazy, but not Crazy Crazy.
I like cats.
I am Laslo.
Did the tour include those lyrics? If not, are there any good lawyers on this site I can talk to?
Just kidding... but jeeze! At least I could get one of those... what do they call it... a trigger warning thingy or something? Pleeze?
What ever happened to the corvair junk yard off of rt 14 in middleton? Or wherever. Wed go there to get our corvair repair parts.
Reminds me of Emo Philips...
"Now, I'm no good in the morning, unless I’ve had that first, piping hot pot of coffee... Oh, I’ve tried other enemas…"
Damikesc said:
"Again, not defending Jeb. If he wins the nomination, I just won't vote."
That'll show 'em!
Nichevo said...
Okay. I order tea at McDonald's, or for that matter a fine French restaurant. Sadly, I get a teabag and a cup of hot water. I wish the water to be served at or close to boiling, so I can take it away and arrange the steeping to my pleasure.
I'm sorry you can't get third-degree burns at McDonald's anymore. But it might cheer you and other tea-drinkers up if you took advantage of the fact that you can get gay-married now. The law taketh away, and the law giveth.
"The plaintiff tried taking the top off of the cup while sitting in her parked car, and it spilled on her lap and burned her pants to her leg. "
Uh huh...and what fabric is this, natural or synthetic, that burns/melts at less than 212 degrees Fahrenheit, the boiling point of water at atmospheric pressure???
"The jury was sending a new price signal. Before, it cost $50,000 a year to sell dangerously hot coffee. After, it would cost millions."
*********
Care to tell us at what temperature "hot" coffee fit to drink is NOT also "hot"? Just where is this "dangerous" zone you so blithely speak of?
Rusty said...
What ever happened to the corvair junk yard off of rt 14 in middleton? Or wherever. Wed go there to get our corvair repair parts.
The same thing that happened to "Peppermint Park" and to "The Big Sky Drive-In" off the Beltline near the Mineral Point crossing (before they built the overpass).
"... in keeping the coffee at a much higher temperature than the customers wanted."
Apparently not. Regardless of the merits of the lawsuit, this is absurd and actually argues the other direction--customers apparently enjoyed McDonald's very hot coffee and bought it in droves. I'm sure every coffee vendor gets sued multiple times every years with claims that the coffee is too hot, even when it's too cold.
One thing I entertain myself with is reading warning labels and wondering what lawsuit prompted [sometimes ridiculously] specific warnings. Then there are objects that have so many warning labels on them, it's absurd. Or otherwise attractive objects with a massive warning sticker smack in the middle (like my glass top TV stand, which warns not to place really heavy objects on it. Anvils, I suppose, are out, dammit.)
"One thing I entertain myself with is reading warning labels..."
Shit! My whole life is a fucking warning label! I should write it down sometime.
Yo BN! She says she's hot and slutty. Why don't you cut yourself a slice and report back? Most edifying I'm sure. You may not be drunk enough though.
"My view is that if you spill something which is known to be hot on yourself, it is your fault. The only exception would be if the container is defective. This means the bottom falls off, not the container failing to survive being squeezed between your thighs."
That was another myth about the case--she hadn't "squeezed" the cup between her thighs, but spilled it on her lap. It was the lid mechanism that was defective (defective design) and was partly the cause of her spill.
The jury had found her at least partly at fault, and reduced the recovery accordingly, but also found McDs negligent due to the defective design for the cup and the extreme temperature (well beyond what their competitors served) which caused a knowing hazard.
There are a lot of frivilous suits and ridiculous verdicts out there--I see them often--but the McDs coffee case was a lot more complicated than the initial stories in the early '90s made it out to be. Should the judge or jury have found against the plaintiff because she assumed the risk when handling hot coffee? Was the initial jury award excessive? Perhaps--but this wasn't quite the story of a stupid woman driving her car while holding coffee between her thighs and burning herself a little and blaming it on McDs that was initially reported.
That'll show 'em!
I don't owe the GOP anything. "Well, they're better than the Dems" is hardly a reason to vote for them, especially given that, when they have power, they aren't appreciably better than Dems anyways.
Until the GOP learns to listen to its voters and not just its donors, they can stay in the WH wilderness for a while.
"That was another myth about the case--she hadn't "squeezed" the cup between her thighs, but spilled it on her lap. It was the lid mechanism that was defective (defective design) and was partly the cause of her spill."
People act like these are established facts. There was no camera, no forensics on the cup, only her word what happened, and possibly the testimony of the other occupant of the car--not an impartial witness.
Only an idiot holds a hot cup on their lap or between their legs while opening the lid. People drone on about it being too hot as if this is something that is unknown--was this the first cup of coffee the lady ever got from McDonald's? Nobody likes spilling coffee on themselves, whether it is too hot or just right. If they do so, then it is called an accident and it it their own fault.
"Care to tell us at what temperature "hot" coffee fit to drink is NOT also "hot"? Just where is this "dangerous" zone you so blithely speak of?"
Not blithely. They went over this at trial. Drop the temp ten degrees, and the coffee is still very hot but does not cause third degree burns after a few seconds.
Did anyone sue the pants makers? How can you possibly melt a pair of pants? That's how you get third degree burns, a lapful of molten polyester. Shouldn't have to wear Nomex to eat breakfast. McD should have been thanked for discovering this time bomb.
"I don't owe the GOP anything. "Well, they're better than the Dems" is hardly a reason to vote for them, especially given that, when they have power, they aren't appreciably better than Dems anyways."
While it's true you don't owe the GOP anything, "they're better than the [other party]" is pretty much the primary reason for voting. I have no illusions about getting exactly what I want out of anyone likely to get elected, largely because my preferences are simply not the preferences of the majority (sure, everyone wants tax reform but no one wants to give up their favorite deductions for it, everyone wants reduced deficits but no one wants entitlements touched, etc.).
As to how bad the GOP can be? It's certainly possible that we could have a GOP president who would be nearly as bad as Hillary--her proposal for prescription drugs is the latest reason why she should never be given power--but if my choice is between someone who will disappoint me half the time and someone who will disappoint me all the time, I'll go with the former.
"People act like these are established facts. There was no camera, no forensics on the cup, only her word what happened, and possibly the testimony of the other occupant of the car--not an impartial witness."
And that's what juries are for--to establish credibility of witnesses and assess actual evidence. Maybe you think this woman was lying, but neither you nor I served on that jury so who knows what we might have thought if we were there.
Speaking of Nader, one of the great ironies I have seen was in 2000 when Nader was running for president. I was walking north of the campus in Berkeley and looked up hill on one of the streets. There was a Corvair in beautiful condition with a Nader for President sticker on it,.
The car she was riding in had no cupholder mechanism, and the woman wanted to add her cream and sugar while the car was stopped, before her grandson pulled off and started driving.
Well fuck.
That excuses everything.
As a passenger it's what the lid of the glove box is for.
chickelit said...
Rusty said...
What ever happened to the corvair junk yard off of rt 14 in middleton? Or wherever. Wed go there to get our corvair repair parts.
The same thing that happened to "Peppermint Park" and to "The Big Sky Drive-In" off the Beltline near the Mineral Point crossing (before they built the overpass).
I hope they didn't just plow em under. It was a landmark on the way to trout country.
Really hot coffee helps w/ my morning sit down. That said, there is a chemical component to caffeine that stimulates the bowels in a % of people. Caffeine also helps loosen the stool. Win/win. I always have my morning sit down after my second cup o' joe. Enjoy your breakfast!
I just finished my 2nd cup.
Ain't it grand when "more pleasing to the average consumer" is reframed into a more venal "commercial advantage." Ralph should go into business selling consumers what they don't want and see how well that works for him.
"I agree with Brando -- Ralph Nader and his piss-ignorant Naderites might be utterly worthless on the best day of their lives, but without him Al Gore might well have been the President on 9/11/2001. Contemplating that still makes me shudder."
Heh. Someone "shuddering" at the thought of Al Gore as president, when what we got was as bad as they come!
Nader didn't affect the election outcome in 2000. Bush campaign skullduggery in Florida and a Supreme Court intrusion into the process did.
"Heh. Someone "shuddering" at the thought of Al Gore as president, when what we got was as bad as they come!"
Considering most Bush critics, myself included, argue that his mistake in the Iraq War was assuming that there couldn't be someone worse running Iraq than Saddam, it's interesting that so many automatically assume that Al Gore would by definition have to have been better than Bush. Considering Gore's own limitations, that is a very shaky premise.
"Nader didn't affect the election outcome in 2000. Bush campaign skullduggery in Florida and a Supreme Court intrusion into the process did."
Ah, this again. Unless you think on balance the thousands of Nader voters would not have voted at all if Nader wasn't on the ballot, and just a few hundred of them on net would not have gone for Gore, it's pretty clear that Nader cost Gore the election. Every single count of the ballots showed Bush ahead, by margins of a few hundred to several hundred. It's possible if they did another several recounts they would have found some that showed Gore ahead, but there's no reason to assume this is true or that those recounts would have been more accurate.
Sadly for Gore, the margin of victory was smaller than the margin of error, but the state had to stick with its law and it shook out in Bush's favor.
I had a 64 Corvair Monza. I loved it. Unlike the VW bug, it would not turn over on a tight curve, it would spin out instead. I experienced both events as a teen. Nader called the Corvair unsafe at any speed, but he had nothing to say about the Nazi inspired hippie-mobile it was designed to compete with. I have always wondered about his motives.
in a semi related story Paul Walkers daughter is suing Porshe because it somehow is partly responsible for paul Walker's death.
If certain juries have their way they might force cars to lower the speed limit allowed so that you can't drive at those speeds. And wont that be fun.
Brando wrote:
Sadly for Gore, the margin of victory was smaller than the margin of error, but the state had to stick with its law and it shook out in Bush's favor.
The other problem for Gore is that he conceded. Once you concede its very hard to unring that bell.
"The lawyers didn’t tell people that McDonald’s kept their coffee that hot for commercial advantage"
Translation for any morons or Democrats out there: That means McDonald's kept their coffee hot because that's what their customer wanted.
And that, because of scumbag lawyers, a sleazy judge, and idiot jurors, the customers no longer get what they want.
Ralph Nader should have been drawn and quartered 40 years ago.
"Unless you think on balance the thousands of Nader voters would not have voted at all if Nader wasn't on the ballot, and just a few hundred of them on net would not have gone for Gore, it's pretty clear that Nader cost Gore the election."
I voted for Nader, and I wouldn't have voted for Gore had Nader not been on the ballot. I assume most Nader voters would have found another third-part candidate to vote for if Nader had not been in the race. If, as I was and am, one is inclined to vote for Nader, (or any third-party candidate), even though it was clear he had no chance of winning, it is not likely one will otherwise vote for one of the two corporate party candidates. Those are people who would not have voted at all, absent other choices.
"Every single count of the ballots showed Bush ahead, by margins of a few hundred to several hundred. It's possible if they did another several recounts they would have found some that showed Gore ahead, but there's no reason to assume this is true or that those recounts would have been more accurate."
This is not true.
A consortium of newspapers commissioned a study to determine who the winner would have been under various recount scenarios, using different methods. Under several other methodologies, Gore would have been found the winner.
You overlook my remark about "Bush campaign skullduggery." The state of Florida--whose governor at the time was related to one of the candidates, (ahem)--disenfranchised thousands of voters in largely "democratic" voting districts, thereby preventing many votes that would have likely been cast for Gore from being cast at all. And there were also voters turned away from their polling places and ballots laid out in such a way that many Gore voters ended up "voting" for Pat Buchanan. All accidental, I'm sure.
Ken.
I had a regular Corvair. It ate fanbelts, but was it ever fun to drive. It was the easiest car to do donuts in and didn't get stuck in the snow.
The Monza version was pretty hot.
"Considering most Bush critics, myself included, argue that his mistakein the Iraq War was assuming that there couldn't be someone worse running Iraq than Saddam, it's interesting that so many automatically assume that Al Gore would by definition have to have been better than Bush. Considering Gore's own limitations, that is a very shaky premise."
His "mistake" was not a mistake but a war crime in invading a country that was not a threat to us. In shattering the government and civic order of Iraq, Bush and his fellow war criminals unleashed chaos in the country, a chaos which is spreading throughout the middle east, and, via refugees, into Europe.
Gore would very possibly have been as bad a president as Bush, but we can never know. We can wonder whether he would have gone to war in Iraq without legitimate or legal basis--as Bush did--but we can also never know that.
We got what we got, and he was as bad as they come. Gore might have been as bad, but he couldn't have been worse.
Gore conceded when Bush threatened to recount the whole state and not just the reliably democrat districts that for some reason leaned republican.
There were five recounts prior to this. The majority found for Bush.
Commercial advantage does not necessarily mean following consumer preference. It could mean cost saving.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा